Hi Zack, I submitted the issue as https://savannah.gnu.org/support/index.php?110395 and sent copyright assignment request to [email protected]
I'll try to provide better test coverage tomorrow. Regards, Nikolai Zack Weinberg <[email protected]> writes: > On Sun, Dec 6, 2020 at 2:51 AM Nikolai Merinov > <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> I already supplied this patch in March this year but did not get >> feedback yet. Currently I updated patch according to actual autoconf >> code. Could you please review it once again? > > Thank you for reminding us about your contribution. > > I regret to say that this change is too risky to accept two days > before the planned 2.70 release. Also, In order to accept it, we > would need you to file a copyright assignment for Autoconf. If you > have already done this just say so; otherwise please read and follow > the instructions at > https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/gnulib.git/tree/doc/Copyright/request-assign.future > . Cite this patch (by URL in the autoconf-patches email archive) > under "what changes have you made so far." > > Please also file a tracking bug for this change at > https://savannah.gnu.org/support/?func=additem&group=autoconf so we > don't forget about it again. > > Finally, I haven't reviewed the code in detail but I would like to see > more comprehensive tests. Right now you're only testing one word in > quotes in CFLAGS; blindly stripping the quotes would do the right > thing. If I understand your goal correctly, you should be testing > things like `configure CC="cc -std=c89"` and > `CPPFLAGS="-Dfunction_like_macro(with, arguments)=..."` (put something > in the ... that actually uses the arguments). Please also try to > think of situations where double evaluation would do the *wrong* > thing; that will help us understand the potential negative > consequences of this change. > > zw
